Search Results

< Back Memes About Animal Resistance Are Everywhere Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond "Nonhuman animals do, in fact, engage in resistance, even if their defiance is futile. The will to prefer life over death is a primary act of resistance, perhaps the only act of dissent available to animals who are subject to extreme forms of control." Memes galore centered on the “orca revolution” have inundated the online realm. They gleefully depict orcas launching attacks on boats in the Strait of Gibraltar and off the Shetland coast . One particularly ingenious image showcases an orca posed as a sickle crossed with a hammer. The cheeky caption reads, “ Eat the rich ,” a nod to the orcas’ penchant for sinking lavish yachts. A surfboard-snatching sea otter in Santa Cruz, California has also claimed the media spotlight. Headlines dub her an “ adorable outlaw ” “ at large .” Memes conjure her in a beret like the one donned by socialist revolutionary Ché Guevara. In one caption, she proclaims, “ Accept our existence or expect resistance … an otter world is possible.” My scholarship centers on animal-human relations through the prism of social justice. As I see it, public glee about wrecked surfboards and yachts hints at a certain flavor of schadenfreude . At a time marked by drastic socioeconomic disparities, white supremacy and environmental degradation, casting these marine mammals as revolutionaries seems like a projection of desires for social justice and habitable ecosystems. A glimpse into the work of some political scientists, philosophers and animal behavior researchers injects weightiness into this jocular public dialogue. The field of critical animal studies analyzes structures of oppression and power and considers pathways to dismantling them. These scholars’ insights challenge the prevailing view of nonhuman animals as passive victims. They also oppose the widespread assumption that nonhuman animals can’t be political actors. So while meme lovers project emotions and perspectives onto these particular wild animals, scholars of critical animal studies suggest that nonhuman animals do in fact engage in resistance. Nonhuman Animal Protest is Everywhere Are nonhuman animals in a constant state of defiance? I’d answer, undoubtedly, that the answer is yes. The entire architecture of animal agriculture attests to animals’ unyielding resistance against confinement and death. Cages, corrals, pens and tanks would not exist were it not for animals’ tireless revolt. Even when hung upside down on conveyor hangars, chickens furiously flap their wings and bite , scratch, peck and defecate on line workers at every stage of the process leading to their deaths. Until the end, hooked tuna resist, gasping and writhing fiercely on ships’ decks. Hooks, nets and snares would not be necessary if fish allowed themselves to be passively harvested . If they consented to repeated impregnation , female pigs and cows wouldn’t need to be tethered to “ rape racks ” to prevent them from struggling to get away. If they didn’t mind having their infants permanently taken from their sides , dairy cows wouldn’t need to be blinded with hoods so they don’t bite and kick as the calves are removed; they wouldn’t bellow for weeks after each instance. I contend that failure to recognize their bellowing as protest reflects “ anthropodenial ” – what ethologist Frans de Waal calls the rejection of obvious continuities between human and nonhuman animal behavior, cognition and emotion. The prevalent view of nonhuman animals remains that of René Descartes, the 17th-century philosopher who viewed animals’ actions as purely mechanical , like those of a machine. From this viewpoint, one might dismiss these nonhuman animals’ will to prevail as unintentional or merely instinctual. But political scientist Dinesh Wadiwel argues that “even if their defiance is futile, the will to prefer life over death is a primary act of resistance , perhaps the only act of dissent available to animals who are subject to extreme forms of control.” Creaturely Escape Artists Despite humans’ colossal efforts to repress them, nonhuman animals still manage to escape from slaughterhouses . They also break out of zoos , circuses, aquatic parks, stables and biomedical laboratories . Tilikum, a captive orca at Sea World, famously killed his trainer – an act at least one marine mammal behaviorist characterized as intentional . Philosopher Fahim Amir suggests that depression among captive animals is likewise a form of emotional rebellion against unbearable conditions, a revolt of the nerves . Dolphins engage in self-harm like thrashing against the tank’s walls or cease to eat and retain their breath until death . Sows whose body-sized cages impede them from turning around to make contact with their piglets repeatedly ram themselves into the metal struts, sometimes succumbing to their injuries . Critical animal studies scholars contend that all these actions arguably demonstrate nonhuman animals’ yearning for freedom and their aversion to inequity . As for the marine stars of summer 2023’s memes, fishing gear can entangle and harm orcas . Sea otters were hunted nearly to extinction for their fur . Marine habitats have been degraded by human activities including overfishing, oil spills, plastic, chemical and sonic pollution, and climate change. It’s easy to imagine they might be responding to human actions , including bodily harm and interference with their turf. What is Solidarity with Nonhuman Animals? Sharing memes that cheer on wild animals is one thing. But there are more substantive ways to demonstrate solidarity with animals. Legal scholars support nonhuman animals’ resistance by proposing that their current classification as property should be replaced with that of personhood or beingness . Nonhuman animals including songbirds, dolphins, elephants , horses, chimpanzees and bears increasingly appear as plaintiffs alleging their subjection to extinction, abuse and other injustices. Citizenship for nonhuman animals is another pathway to social and political inclusion. It would guarantee the right to appeal arbitrary restrictions of domesticated nonhuman animals’ autonomy. It would also mandate legal duties to protect them from harm. Everyday deeds can likewise convey solidarity. Boycotting industries that oppress nonhuman animals by becoming vegan is a powerful action. It is a form of political “counter-conduct,” a term philosopher Michel Foucault uses to describe practices that oppose dominant norms of power and control. Creating roadside memorials for nonhuman animals killed by motor vehicles encourages people to see them as beings whose lives and deaths matter , rather than mere “roadkill .” Political scientists recognize that human and nonhuman animals’ struggles against oppression are intertwined . At different moments, the same strategies leveraged against nonhuman animals have cast segments of the human species as “less than human” in order to exploit them. The category of the human is ever-shifting and ominously exclusive . I argue that no one is safe as long as there is a classification of “animality.” It confers susceptibility to extravagant forms of violence , legally and ethically condoned. Might an ‘Otter World’ Be Possible? I believe quips about the marine mammal rebellion reflect awareness that our human interests are entwined with those of nonhuman animals. The desire to achieve sustainable relationships with other species and the natural world feels palpable to me within the memes and media coverage. And it’s happening as human-caused activity makes our shared habitats increasingly unlivable. Solidarity with nonhuman animals is consistent with democratic principles – for instance, defending the right to well-being and opposing the use of force against innocent subjects . Philosopher Amir recommends extending the idea that there can be no freedom as long as there is still unfreedom beyond the species divide: “While we may not yet fully be able to picture what this may mean, there is no reason we should not begin to imagine it ”. This is a republish in its entirety through permission from The Conversation . Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond works at the intersection of critical animal studies, decolonial studies, and comparative race and slavery studies. Above all, she is interested in troubling the human/animal divide, anthropocentrism, and the entanglement of animalization with racialization. Her publications include the book chapters, "Dogs without Masters: Astray with Akbar and in André Alexis' Fifteen Dogs" (2022), "A Pale Shade of Violet: Animals and Race in Machado de Assis" (2022), “Haunting Pigs, Swimming Jaguars: Mourning, Animals, and Ayahuasca” (2020), and "Slave Barracks Aristocrats: Islam and the Orient in the Work of Gilberto Freyre" (2014). She has also authored articles such as "Of She-Wolves and Mad Cows: Animality, Anthropophagy, and the State of Exception in Cláudio Assis's Amarelo Manga" (2011) and “Akbar Stole My Heart: Coming Out as an Animalist” (2013), as well as the monograph, "White Negritude: Race, Writing, and Brazilian Cultural Identity" (2008), and the edited volume, "The Masters and the Slaves: Plantation Relations and Mestizaje in American Imaginaries" (2005). In addition to her scholarly publications, she has contributed to various media outlets, including The Advocate, The Conversation, CounterPunch, Ms. Magazine, Persianesque, the Folha de S. Paulo, and Truthout. Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Previous Next

“Job v. God is the Marbury v. Madison of theological law.” < Back Job Verses God: The Trial of the Epoch David Cowles Jun 1, 2024 “Job v. God is the Marbury v. Madison of theological law.” Those of us old enough to remember 1995 know the impact a good trial can have on society. For nearly a year, business paused, and an entire nation focused on a Los Angeles courtroom: “Hush! Hush! Whisper who dares! Christopher Robin is saying his prayers.” O.J. Simpson was on trial! Vietnam, Civil Rights, Rodney King, nothing polarized this nation quite like OJ. It’s appropriately known as the ‘Trial of the Century’ and it is certainly one of the seminal public events in my superannuated lifetime. But it pales in comparison to a trial that took place 3000 years earlier at an undisclosed location somewhere in the Middle East; I’m referring, of course, to Job v. God . Astonishingly, we have a verbatim transcript of those proceedings, virtually intact! The text is embedded in the Old Testament Book of Job. Here’s the ‘run-up’: Job, a virtuous man by all accounts, right in his personal conduct, just and generous in his dealings with others, suddenly loses his wealth, his children, his reputation, his social standing, and eventually, his health. He is the victim of an ‘Act of God’. That God acted capriciously in this matter is not in dispute. He admits it and shows no remorse. God is no Bill Clinton; he does not feel Job’s pain! The legal issue here is whether God, being God, the Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, is entitled to act capriciously. I mean, he is God after all! That’s got to count for something, right? Or to put it the other way, is there a higher law that can bring even God to heel? The Book of Job is a 40 chapter epic poem bookended by a short prose prologue and epilogue. The provenance of the prose is suspect and its semantic relation to the poem itself is dubious, so we’ll focus on the OG epic itself. Job’s physical suffering is overwhelming, but surprisingly, that is not his biggest complaint, not by a long shot. Torture is nothing compared to existential angst. You know that. You’ve tossed and turned at 2AM, lying on Egyptian cotton sheets. “(Human beings) are quashed more easily than a moth, from daybreak to evening they are crushed; when it is not even nightfall, they disappear, forever unnoticed. The pegs of their tent are pulled up. They die without knowledge.” (4: 19b – 21) Job is possibly the most misunderstood character in all of Judeo-Christian literature. He is famous for his patience: he is anything but patient! He is about to lead an assault on Heaven, only slightly less ferocious than Lucifer’s…but enormously more successful. Job’s crusade is about to put an end to humanity’s dreams of an Imperial Deity. Job’s determination does not come out of any personal disrespect for God but rather out of profound ‘faith in the system’ (legal and cosmic). While society around him has accepted the notion of God as benevolent but erratic, Job holds out for a higher value: Justice. Job is joined by a cadre of ‘false friends’. They reject the notion that God can act capriciously. From Job’s ‘reduced circumstances’ they infer evidence of sin. They advise Job to ‘cop a plea’: Admit guilt (even if you don’t feel it) and ask God to commute your sentence to time served. Sensible advice, abhorrent to Job! Job will not debase himself, not even before God. And he will not corrupt the value of Truth with a false pleading. Rather than plead out, Job welcomes a trial: It gives him an opportunity to confront his opponent ‘face-to-face’ and a chance to question God directly. Job’s reasoning? If I cannot get my conviction overturned, at least I can gain a better understanding of ‘what makes God tick’. That alone would be worthwhile. Like many corporate litigants today, Job not only wants to win his suit; he also hopes to force God to divulge ‘trade secrets’. Job will use the trial to ask God for nothing less than a full accounting of himself and his activities: what did he have in mind when he ‘created the heavens and the earth’, why didn’t he do a better job, and why doesn’t he fix it…now? And so the trial begins. Job, the Plaintiff, appears pro se ; God, in absentia , is represented by a self-appointed legal team – the very same ‘friends’ that previously counseled Job to cop a plea. This is the Old Testament’s version of Johnny Cochran’s Dream Team…only much less competent . Pity any god who cannot afford better legal representation than this! Job carries a heavy legal burden. To defeat God’s application for Summary Judgment, Job must show that there is a court of competent jurisdiction, that he is the victim of a tort, that he has legal standing to bring an action, and that a potential remedy exists. (Note that God’s agency in Job’s tragedy is not at issue.) Job v. God opens with Job offering the court a detailed summary of the injustices done to him. Then, one by one, God’s attorneys attempt to “justify the ways of God to men (sic).” ( Paradise Lost ). Of course, God’s team resorts to the full bag of legal tricks. Can’t defend the assailant? No problem, put the victim on trial instead. God’s lawyers go to great lengths to demonstrate Job’s culpability…and they advance some novel legal theories in the process: Job is being punished, not for his own sins, not even for the sins of his father, but for the sins of his sons. Job is being punished now for the future crime of taking God to court. As in Through the Looking-glass , the miscreant first serves his sentence, then goes on trial (“Guilty!”), and only later commits the crime for which he has been convicted, sentenced, and punished. Surprisingly, Job finds a way to turn this argument against his adversaries later in the proceedings. One by one, Job effortlessly swats away his opponents’ arguments. Against the dogmatic deductions of his friends, Job appeals to empirical facts; here’s a ‘Cliff’s Notes’ version: “I have lived a righteous and just life; yet I am being punished most severely. Others, not nearly as upright as me, often in fact deliberate doers of evil, are not punished at all. They live lavish lives in good health and pass that wealth onto future generations, intact. I on the other hand, have no assets, and no children to leave them to if I did, and I live on a dunghill, covered with scabs.” That said, Job was not born last night. He realizes that he’ll struggle to meet his legal burdens. Most likely, a court will conclude that: No court has the power to compel God to answer charges…or comply with judgments; Job’s circumstances do not constitute a tort; No one can ever have standing to sue God; and No plausible remedy exists. So, Job decides to invoke the doctrine of ‘Jury Nullification’; he asks the court to look past the veil of law and judge the case based on its existential merits, on common law and natural law , based on universal values and empirical evidence, without regard to legal or religious pre-conceptions. Job’s argument for Nullification is complex…but ultimately irrefutable; note how it ingeniously puts the twisted logic of God’s attorneys (above) to purpose: God is assumed to be immune from civil suits because he is God. Even so, such immunity would not extend to a similarly situated defendant who was not God. Consequently, it is necessary to establish that God is God before the court can rule on his immunity claim. But how? “God is good (adjective) and Good (noun). God does not choose to be good; God is good by nature (it’s his essence ). As Jean-Paul Sartre frequently pointed out, God is the one and only being whose essence precedes his existence! “An important component of Good is Justice (along with Beauty and Truth). If it is shown that a ‘god’ deliberately engaged in unjust behavior, then this cannot be God. And a god that is not God can assert no valid claim for immunity.” Brilliant! Job is arguing that the court must decide the merits of the case first… before it can determine if the defendant is entitled to immunity. And the court agrees! An unjust God would be a violation of Natural Law ( aka the Good), a ‘law’ God created and later codified in Torah. So, there is a remedy after all: the court can simply order God to be God and God cannot refuse because God is God. The Job-poet anticipates Dante. In Inferno , folks are sentenced to ‘be themselves’, eternally. Could a more fearsome punishment possibly be imagined? Did I mention that Job went ‘all in’? Consider this: We are used to a legal system where the burden of proof falls squarely on the Plaintiff. In Job’s world that burden is shared but the preponderance falls on the Defendant. “Prove you didn’t do it!” Hence, the importance of an alibi. However, Job can overcome this presumption of guilt, and even reverse it, by swearing an ‘Oath of Innocence’. According to the common legal customs of the ancient Middle East ( The Egyptian Book of the Dead ), when one party swears a proper Oath of Innocence, that party is immediately presumed to be innocent. Job so swears. Now, if God still wants to contest Job’s claim, he must appear in person and accept that the burden of proof is now on him. But there’s a downside for Job. If a party offers an Oath of Innocence that is later judged to be untrue, the ‘taker of false oaths’ will have earned himself additional punishment, too severe to be detailed in this article. Excerpts of Job’s oath are worth a read (note its highly structured legal form): “If ever a poor man would extend me his hand, if in time of disaster he cried out to me…If I’ve ever thwarted a poor man’s desires…or ate a loaf by myself so an orphan could not eat of it…If I ever saw a vagabond with nothing to wear or the needy with nothing to cover him...If I ever raised my hand to the fatherless…If I ever made gold my reliance and called pure gold ‘my precious’…If I ever rejoiced at my enemy’s ruin and exalted when evil befell him…If ever my land has complained of me, if ever it’s furrows cried out…” (31) Job seals his oath: “Here is my mark, let Shaddai respond! … Complete are the words of Job.” (31: 35-40) God can ‘read a room’ as well as the next guy. He sees that his team is losing. Hoping to avoid an adverse judgment, he takes over his own defense and decides to testify after all. He appears “out of the whirlwind” and takes the stand. Is there a more exciting moment in all of literature? Almighty God, summoned to court by a man who lives on a dunghill; God complying, furiously raging, tail between his legs. “Oscar! Oscar!” God imagines that he can dispose of Job with a simple display of pyrotechnics ( aka majesty and might). That usually does the trick where muggles are concerned! But Job is no muggle, far from it in fact, as God is about to learn to his everlasting dismay. God is supremely confident, over-confident as it turns out, that he can prevail in Earl Stanley Gardner’s Case of the Pesky Plaintiff . He decides to approach the challenge as an American Presidential nominee might approach a debate with her opponent. God begins by questioning Job’s ‘real world’ experience. But first, he sarcastically calls on Job to put on his big boy pants: “Who is this who obscures good counsel, (using) words without knowledge? Bind up your loins like a man! I will ask you – and you will help me know !” (38: 2-3) Job bears God’s condescension silently…but, as we shall see, he files it away for future use. God has a keen sense of humor! ( ditto Job.) God suggests that he is here to learn from Job. In fact, of course, his questions are designed to demean Job, to demonstrate that Job has no business being on the same stage, much less giving instruction: “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundations? (38: 4) …Have you ever reached the sources of the Sea and walked on the bottom of the Ocean? Were you ever shown the gates of Death?” (38: 16-17) “Have you ever in your days summoned daybreak? Made known to the dawning its place, holding the earth by its corners so the wicked would be shaken from it?” (38: 12-13) As sarcastically as possible, God highlights Job’s inexperience; then he questions Job’s competence. Can Job do the things that God does? Can he do them better? If the answer is negative, then what’s the point of Job’s ridiculous lawsuit? And what’s the remedy? “Do you hunt down prey for the lion and quell the hunger of beasts?” (38: 39) “Can you tie the wild ox by rope to a furrow?... Do you give the horse its bravery…Does the falcon take flight through your wisdom?” (39: 1-7) Here God pauses, thinking his work is done. Confident that he has put forward irrefutable arguments, he takes one last swipe at his opponent: “Should Eloah answer (such) an accuser (Job)?” (40: 2) In God’s opening discourse, he attempts to bully Job into submission; but Job is well aware that God has not answered a single one of his complaints. Plus, Job cannot let God’s sarcastic taunts go unanswered; he cannot back down to the school yard bully. Against that background then, what follows seems surprising: “Lacking respect, how can I answer you? My hand I place over my mouth. I have spoken once and I will not repeat; twice, and I will no more.” (40: 4-5) This is traditionally interpreted as Job dropping his suit. It is easy to see how these words could be read as an ‘Act of Contrition’. Job placing his hand over his mouth could be interpreted as a gesture of submission. But does that meaning make sense? Would Job confess to disrespecting God when he had only the greatest respect for the Deity? Or did he cover his mouth as if to say, “I have said all there is to say, and you have not refuted any of my allegations. Why should I talk?” If this was to be Job’s resignation, then why did God feel the need to deliver a second full throated defense? Remember, God does not want to be here. Had Job truly conceded, God would have been out of there in a flash, secrets intact. So how else might the verse be read? Could it be it’s God who’s disrespected Job, that Job is the object of the disrespect, not its subject? Therefore, Job’s original testimony should be more than enough to secure judgment for the Plaintiff. Job need not talk past the close! The first God/Job exchange boiled down to taunting, bullying and name calling. (Good thing nothing like that could ever happen today!) But now the time for posturing is past; it’s time for God to ‘get real’. God wants a settlement, but to get it, he will have to ‘open his books’. He will need to share with Job deep secrets regarding the process of creation and the structure of the world. He must grant Job’s request for knowledge! Unlike Adam, Job will be allowed to eat fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. Remember, Job has not asked God to abdicate; he has not asked for restitution, much less reparations; he has not even asked God to end his suffering. Job is clear, he’s in this for one thing only: knowledge! In his 2nd speech, God first challenges Job to work with him to rid the world of injustice: “If you’ve an arm (as strong as) El’s…look for the proud and lay him low…crush the wicked where they stand. Cover them all in dust; in dust wrap their faces! Then I myself will praise you as your right hand brings you triumph.” (40: 8-14) This time God challenges Job, not to do something cosmic, something absurd on the face of it, but to do something that is local and conceivable but just very, very hard. God is happy to join Job’s Crusade, but first he needs to give Job a ‘heads-up’: the problem is not as simple as it seems, nor the remedy as easy as it looks. The balance of God’s testimony concerns two of his more ‘monstrous’ creations, Behemoth and Leviathan, introduced as a way of explaining to Job the ‘ecology’ of the world: “Behold now Behemoth which like you I created...Can you pull out Leviathan with a fishhook? Can you bind his tongue with a rope? ...Will he make a pact with you? Will he be your slave forever? Can you toy with him like a bird? …Who has ever confronted him and survived?” (40: 15 – 41: 3a) “Of all that’s under heaven, he is mine. I cannot keep silent about him, the fact of his incomparable valor…He has no match on earth, who is made as fearless as he? …Over beasts of all kinds he is king.” (41: 3b - 26) Even if God could rid the world of Behemoth and Leviathan, he wouldn’t do so! He’s proud of his creatures, he loves them, and he knows that they have a role to play in the ecology of creation. And besides, he’s crushing on Leviathan. We’re transported to the 18th century (Leibniz). This is not the best world imaginable ; it is just the best world possible . And that world includes Leviathan (or his functional equivalent)…sorry! Such ‘beasts’ are an integral part of nature; they have unique qualities (genes) of their own. True, their behavior may appear ‘evil’ from the perspective of creatures with conflicting interests (like us) but just imagine what other species would say about homo sapiens ! So ends God’s defense! The Job-poem ends with Job’s ‘final speech’…and this time it really is final. Job gets the last word…and just listen to what he has to say: “Who is this hiding counsel without knowledge? Truly I’ve spoken without comprehending – wonders beyond me that I do not know. Hear now and I will speak! I will ask you and you help me know. As a hearing by the ear, I have heard you, and now my eye has seen you. That is why I am fed up; I take pity on ‘dust and ashes’ (i.e., humanity).” (42: 3-6) Notice that Job’s closing lines (38: 1-3) nearly duplicate God’s opening… complete with the dripping sarcasm. But now, it is Job, relishing victory, who mocks God, not the other way around. We’ve come full circle and there can no longer be any doubt about the outcome of this trial. But before we ‘call’ the contest for Job, we’d better check to see how the media is spinning it. Oops! In a review of 17 independent commentaries on Job that were written over the past 150 years, Job scholar, Stephen Vicchio, found 15 calling the judgment for God and only 2 calling it for Job. Like Job’s ‘friends’, and the Chicago Tribune , we see the evidence of the world through the filtered lens of our preconceived notions: “Dewey defeats Truman!” Job v. God is the Marbury v. Madison of theological law. It confirms and codifies the structure of Being itself. It affirms the absolute universality and supremacy of Value (Good – Beauty, Truth, Justice). It answers once and for all the perennial question: Is Good ‘good’ because God wills it or does God will good because it is Good? The verdict of the court: God is subject to the same objective ethical values and standards as the rest of us; they are enforceable; he enjoys no privileged immunity. “Who’d a thunk it?” ( Hairspray ) David Cowles is the founder and editor-in-chief of Aletheia Today Magazine. He lives with his family in Massachusetts where he studies and writes about philosophy, science, theology, and scripture. He can be reached at david@aletheiatoday.com . Return to Summer 2024 Share Previous Next Click here. Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, Fall Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back Credit Where Credit Is Due Magesh "I would like to share how I create music, but more importantly, where my music comes from." I have been a professional musician for nearly 30 years. During that time I have performed with some of the world's most famous artists. Getting to experience performing music with top professionals is fascinating to say the least. When musicians are asked how they come up with such a beautiful melody, the answer usually surprises me. I would like to share how I create music, but more importantly, where my music comes from. **** I was called by a record company executive about one of his new artists. The artist was to open for Justin Timberlake on his Australian tour. There was only one small problem: three days before the concert, the artist said he didn't want to perform with a backing track; he wanted a live band. The record company executive asked me if I could put together a great band and rearrange the music in three days. I told him I could do it in two days but three days would be fine! Clearly, I was joking. Pulling off such an amazing feat in such a short time frame needed an amazing amount of faith. I prayed that everything would surpass all expectations. Once the music was sent to me, I got to work. I listened to the backing tracks intently to see how I would have live musicians play parts that were synthesized. This is an art form in itself. I would listen and then close my eyes to see what emotion was being conveyed. If the emotion was excitement, I might add a driving bassline. If it were a romantic melody, I would add strings to convey that feeling. When I'm programming music, I open myself up completely. I ask the Lord to flow through me and fill me with clarity, insight, and creativity. I don't feel the ideas are coming from me but through me. This is an important distinction. The record company had to approve the music that I had rearranged. It needed to be done to a high degree, as there was little time to make changes. To my delight, the record company loved the music, and we opened for Justin Timberlake. The tour sold out, and we performed to thousands of people every night. **** Many years ago I was asked to give drum clinics for a popular electronic drum brand. They sent me their equipment and told me to use it for three months. After that period, I would go on tour to promote the equipment. It's important for me, as an artist, to always put an original spin on things. I didn't want to just go out and tell people a lot of boring information about a product. After about a month of playing the electric drum kits, I felt burnt out. How could I make my performance original when all electronic drum kits sounded the same? That night I prayed, asking the Lord to help me create something brand new – something that would make people excited about hearing the music I was creating. The next morning I was working out what samples I would use to highlight the best features of the electric drum kits. I might sample a funky guitar riff that goes for 60 seconds or an R&B piano lick that loops after 20 seconds. This is where things get interesting. As the unit was in 'sample' mode, something extraordinary happened. I accidentally left the delay effect on. All of a sudden the beat I was playing started delaying in real time! If you have ever heard a song where they put a delay effect on the singer's voice, it sounds spectacular. This is a little trick they do in the studio AFTER the song has been recorded. What I was doing was creating this effect in the moment. It changed everything! Once again, I didn't want to take credit for the outcome. I believe my faith is what made the epiphany happen. A week before the drum clinic tour was to start, I had a meeting with the company. When I told them how I could put live effects on the electric drum kit in real time, they didn't believe me. They said the machine wasn't intended to be used that way. They also marveled at how someone could create music from what they considered a 'fortunate accident.’ I didn't want to take credit for the extraordinary outcome. I wanted to give credit where credit was due. Not to me but to the Lord. This clinic tour ran for a month and covered all the major Australian cities. It was considered a massive success by the company. Three days after the first show, the store sold over $70,000 worth of their product. Not only was the brand promoted positively, but the audience got to experience music that was truly created out of faith. Image artwork by Magesh. Magesh has written for “Lessonface,” “Aeyons,” “The Modern Rogue,” “Euronews,” “The Roland corporation,” “Penlight,” and “Elite Music.” He writes several monthly publications on music education. In the past, Magesh has written for parenting, humor, mental health, and travel websites as well. Return to our Spring 2023 Table of Contents Previous Next

< Back No More Novels David Cowles Mar 18, 2026 “Most novels have an overriding purpose: to justify the ways of men to God.” I must confess I’ve never been much for novels. Give me a good epic any day, maybe a short story or a play, or some poetry, but novels…not so much. Of course, I have my favorites but after Ulysses , Sons and Lovers , et al. my ‘best of’ list gets pretty pedestrian. What can I say about novels that are universally true? Nothing. The genre has been so overworked, so crowded with anti-novels, that any affirmative statement is bound to elicit a list of exceptions. How do you get Charles Dickens, Gertrude Stein, Franz Kafka, and Alain Robbe-Grillet in a room together? Novels range from panoramic swashbucklers to intimate streams of consciousness. They can include 100 characters or just one. They can cover events over multiple continents and multiple generations or they can all take place in one room, in one mind, or on one day (e.g. Bloomsday, June 16, 1904). But regardless of setting or scope, most novels have an overriding purpose, ‘to justify the ways of men (sic) to God’. They seek to account for a person’s feelings, thoughts and acts in terms of external influences: class or caste, childhood trauma, cultural heritage, etc. But the one thing no one can ever do is to ‘account for’ another person’s acts. Being a person means being unaccountable or, what amounts to the same thing, being accountable only to oneself. My life is not the mechanical result of unseen causes nor is it the product of my own grand designs. It is a series of free, creative responses to disconnected ‘events’, be they mundane, miraculous or absurd. That said, I don’t experience my life as entirely random either. The appearance of continuity is generally strong but attributable to two essentially independent phenomena: (1) the continuity I choose to impose via my creative reactions to the actual world as it appears at various times and places, and (2) the continuity imparted by the interwoven fabric of objective events (Sartre’s facticity). Life is like a word game played at a very high level. A member of the audience shouts out a phrase. I must immediately use that phrase in a sentence and then elaborate that sentence into a story that is original, well-crafted, and meaningful, all the while keeping my audience entertained, preferably laughing or crying or, even better, both. There must be easier ways to make a living! Happily though, there’s a trick to it! True, I have no way to control or predict what phrase an audience will throw at me. But my audience and I do share a huge volume of common knowledge, and I can rely on that shared background to act as foundation and scaffolding for my narrative. I sketch a few broad strokes in the dust, and I count on my audience to fill in with context. In the end, my story is a blend of creativity (me) and continuity (audience). It is a story of ‘events’, i.e. relatively dynamic figures against relatively static ground. I am wise to alter as little as possible in my telling and to rely as much as possible on our shared background to carry my story. In my view at least, the best performances combine the broadest possible use of common ground with the most intense flights of novelty. My categorial imperative: “Change as much as necessary but as little as possible.” No matter how introspective, novels look at people from outside-in. I know authors are concerned with emotions, motivations, and mental states. And stream of consciousness purports to take us into Jung’s backroom to see Freud’s sausage being made. But all this is external to me. It’s surface! I am neti, neti – not this, not that (Sartre’s Neant ). I begin where the world leaves off. I am not what the world is; I am what the world is not. “I dream of things that never were and ask, ‘Why not?’.” (Robert Kennedy) Whatever you can say about a character is external to that character. As soon as you shoehorn an insight into a symbolic system, a language, for communication purposes, your insight takes on an order not organic to it. The vine-picked grape has become fine wine, you know, with ‘hints of cassis and tobacco’. Simplistically speaking, a language consists of its vocabulary and its grammar. Grammar in turn includes a substructural infra-grammar that determines how we break down our perceptual field into semantic quanta, e.g. words, and a syntax which determines how we reassemble those words to form meaningful propositions. A good character is likely to have some rough edges. Stephen, Leopold, and Molly certainly do! But ‘a rough edge’ implies ‘a solid core’ and that’s something no real person possesses. In fact, we are Eliot’s hollow men and I’m not sure a novel can ever fully capture that emptiness. Even existential angst, when expressed in language, becomes superficial. The real life of a real person is disordered, chaotic. Nothing follows automatically from anything else. It is an archipelago of events spread across an inert medium. How do I differentiate an ‘event’ from that medium? To be ‘real’ an event must satisfy Bateson’s Criterion , i.e. it must be a difference that makes a difference. As such, an event is a unit of information : it must differentiate itself from its medium and it must deflect the course of events going forward. Paradigm : Hercules cleaning the Aegean Stables. The river’s flow is diverted and the stalls are properly mucked. “My life is a matrix of nodes. Each node is a bifurcation point. Like GPS: I enter my destination based on the values I wish to instantiate and a program calculates all available routes.” Who am I? Answer : Robert Frost . One way or another, subtly or heavily, the novelist attempts to account for my chosen values and my actions (route) in pursuit of those values. It’s a thankless task. Personally, I’ll stick to Homer: ‘a god made me do it’…and I am that god, for me. *** Carl Spitzweg’s The Bookworm shows an elderly scholar perched on a library ladder, yet surrounded by shelves full of volumes he pays no attention to, creating a quiet irony in the scene. His focus narrows to the few books he clutches—one open, others tucked under his arm or between his knees—while the vast, untouched collection around him emphasizes how much he is ignoring. This contrast turns the painting into a gentle satire of obsessive scholarship, suggesting that even in a room overflowing with knowledge, he sees only the tiny slice he already holds. Previous Share Next Do you like what you just read and want to read more Thoughts? Subscribe today for free! Thoughts While Shaving - the official blog of Aletheia Today Magazine. Click here.

< Back That Time You Saw Dead People--What's so scary about that? Annie D. Stutley What scared me was that something I never thought was possible just might be. The first time I saw a ghost I was 20 years old. It was Epiphany weekend, and we were opening presents at my grandparents’ house in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, when from the love seat in the living room, I looked up to see a woman, dressed in pink with a high auburn bun, standing in the adjacent dining room. She then moved to a set of windows and vanished. My breath hitched. It’s important to note that even "Scooby-Doo" scares me, that I’m 44 years old and afraid of the dark, and that while binge-watching “Stranger Things,” I made my children sleep in my bed and not the other way around. I am a classic scaredy-cat, afraid of my own shadow, and yet, the pink lady revealed herself to me. Why, God? Why? I don’t know who finally noticed that I’d stopped talking, moving, or even blinking. But I eventually squeaked out an anxious, “I think I saw a ghost.” At this, Grandma perked up. “Was she wearing pink?” That’s when the hairs on the back of my neck rose. “Uh-huh...” “Was her hair piled atop her head?” “Uh-huh...” I could hear my heart pounding. “And she was walking to the windows?” “Uh-huh…” Why was no one panicking with me? I’d have gotten a bigger reaction out of seeing a cockroach cross the dining room. “Oh, well, that was my mother then. I often see her. Where the dining room windows are used to be a sun porch. She loved that porch.” Grandma took a sip of her cocktail before adding, “She was likely going to take in the moon and relax.” She said this like it was completely normal to have her dead mother roaming around the house, like everyone’s dead relatives are just hanging out at home, like I know you'll never be able to close your eyes again, Annie, but don’t worry. She’s just taking in the moon! Thanks, Grandma. That night I didn’t sleep. My grandparents’ house was built before the Civil War, and our family had lived in it since 1890. Rumor was Grandma's mother, the infamous pink lady, held séances in the library of the house and that one time the table around which they contacted the dead levitated. So, how many other spirits were hanging out, taking in the moon? I got my answer a few days later. In a corner of the dining room was an upright piano. Should my grandparents and their friends have a rousing cocktail hour, it usually involved the piano, where classics were crooned out with the aid of Jim Beam. Before she passed away, my Great Aunt Edith was usually the one tickling the ivories. Then Grandma took over. But they had similar playing skills and almost identical sopranos, making it easy to mix up the two. So, when I was walking downstairs a couple of afternoons later, having put the ghost of my great-grandmother behind me enough to be upstairs alone in the daylight, I heard Grandma on the piano singing. I found it a bit early for a rousing cocktail hour, even for my family. But when I got to the bottom of the stairs, through the side transom windows that divided the living and dining rooms, it wasn’t Grandma whom I saw at the piano. It was Aunt Edith--Aunt Edith who had been dead since I was 13 and at whose funeral I got sick from pea salad. Once again, I couldn’t move. Then I blinked several times. This wasn’t real. This couldn’t be happening. But Aunt Edith played on peacefully, and then she was suddenly gone. She dissolved completely, like smoke softening in the air. I ran to the kitchen and breathlessly cried, “I saw Aunt Edith! I saw Aunt Edith!” Grandma, again unfazed, asked for the deets and when I was through, all she said was, “You have the gift, Annie.” “What gift?” I prayed I was unworthy. “You can see beyond.” “I don’t want this gift,” I adamantly said. “You don’t have a choice,” she smiled. So, that was it then. I saw dead people. The following year, my grandmother passed away. Not long after that, like a complete idiot, I agreed to see “The Sixth Sense” in the theater. Sweet baby Jesus, tell me that I’m not some ghost therapist like that poor kid , I thought. It isn’t an exaggeration to describe the time that followed as my having applied the buddy system at all hours at my grandparents’ house. If I was gonna see dead people, I’d at least have an arm to clutch if the ghosts tried to take me with them back to whatever sun porch in the sky where they convened. But I never saw any ghosts again. As time moved on, I convinced myself that the phenomenon was in my head and that, as I’d always thought before, ghosts aren’t real. Then something truly beyond logic happened long after I saw dead people, something that convinced me none of it had been born from the imagination of a paranoid scaredy-cat. I had just given birth to a chubby, little, round-faced boy who had my eyes. I was all at once weepy and energized, like I could have a good cry and then climb the highest mountain ten times over. But then it started—the bleeding. And soon, I wasn’t weepy or energized. I was warm. I was cozy. I was somewhere else, a serene place where the physical world was bustling all around me, but I was contentedly still. The experience was sort of like when you’re at the beach and children are splashing nearby, someone’s speaker plays music, seagulls squawk about, and yet, you’re able to find that quiet place in the roar of the waves to slip away. I turned my head and saw my husband holding my baby boy, whose finger was wrapped around his. “Don’t close your eyes, Annie. Stay with me,” he pleaded. His eyes looked desperate. I moved my head just an inch and lost track of him. I closed my eyes for what felt like the most luxurious hour. I felt the sun on my skin. I felt the softest blanket laid upon me. My head nestled into the cushiest pillow. Even my toes were swathed in warmth. Far away I heard doctors shouting orders, the rattle of instruments on metal tables, and my husband's pleas to look at him. But I didn’t join their panic. I was the most peaceful I had ever been. Hours later, when I finally held my baby, it was explained to me that I’d lost three quarters of my blood, and I’d be receiving transfusions overnight. My teeth chattered. I was shaking. I noticed heated blankets piled on top of me. Apparently, as I began to bleed, my body temperature dropped significantly, and I was ice-cold. “But I wasn’t cold,” I argued. “It was lovely.” It was only then that I became scared, only then that the hairs on the back of my neck finally stood. I know what I had experienced. It had to be real, and yet, there was no explanation. Some could explain that my ghost encounters were a reflection of myself in the glass of the transoms, or that the sound of Aunt Edith was an echo from somewhere in the house or outside. They might explain that my experience in the labor room was a slip of consciousness. And they may be right. But one thing became clear to me in the weeks following childbirth: the ghosts themselves never scared me, and that warm place wasn’t scary. What scared me was that something I never thought was possible just might be. And I knew then that explanations are just a band-aid solution we use on our psyche to prevent us from believing something beyond the safety of our norm. I know enough to know that there is no proof I’ve seen dead people. And there is no proof that I’ve been beyond this realm, peeking into the next. I only have my story, and the fact that, to me, it was all quite real. It’s like Dumbledore says to Harry Potter, "Of course it is happening inside your head, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” Outside, the air is brisk, and the mood is haunting. Ghosts, goblins, and the spooktacular Halloween season is prime for a good scare. And whether what spooks us is born from fantasy or not, what makes the hairs on the back of our necks stand up doesn’t always need an explanation. Maybe spirits are closer than we think? Maybe the journey to the afterlife is luxurious? Maybe seeing beyond means seeing beyond what scares us and into possibilities safe from logic? What’s so scary about that? Maybe that’s the gift the pink lady was trying to give me. Originally published in New Orleans Magazine online, shared with permission by the author. Annie D. Stutley lives and writes in New Orleans, La. She edits several small publications and contributes to various print and online magazines. Her blog, " That Time You, " was ranked in the Top 100 Blogs by FeedSpot. To read more of her work, go to her website , or follow her at @anniedstutley or Annie D. Stutley-writer on Facebook. Previous Next

< Back The Dance of Autumn Deborah Rutherford "Autumn is a season of Remembrance – where we remember what God has done for us and are thankful and praise Him for His Goodness." Can we reflect on God's goodness as the seasons change and Winter approaches? I called my husband, Don, into the prayer room. Outside the large windows adorned with white faux wood blinds, we marveled at the first leaves of Fall changing their hues. I had anticipated this moment—the vibrant burst of colors. Yet, soon, the trees would shed their foliage, nearly stripping themselves bare. Don remarked, "See, Fall has arrived," as I recalled the skeptics who had doubted its arrival this year. We had just returned from our annual beach trip to Florida, which we had delayed this year, allowing us to experience the transition from Summer to Fall. At the beach, it still felt like Summer, despite what the calendar said. We basked in the sun, enjoyed the ocean waves, and relished in the warmth. I asked Don what Fall meant to him, and he replied, "Football, turkey, outdoor barbecues, watching the leaves change, and eventually raking them up." I nodded in agreement, acknowledging the beauty of the leaves, even though I knew they would eventually fall and need to be gathered into piles. As I contemplated this change of season, I pondered my own feelings about Fall. Had I harvested and reaped what was necessary in my life? Were there things I needed to let go of? Don and I had just emerged from a challenging and demanding season, facing trials that felt like walking through a den of lions. Yet, with God's guidance, we had made it through. Now, we found ourselves on the mountaintop of faith, enjoying the harvest and redemption that only God could provide after such a trying journey. I reflected on the various changes happening in my circle of friends and family—some leaving long careers behind, others facing unexpected health challenges, and some embarking on new journeys like my brother-in-law with his new job. In some cases, I witnessed how God had transformed adversity into beauty. I questioned the nature of this season and why I felt hesitant to fully embrace it. I admitted it: as the season began and everyone around me discussed Autumn, shared fall-inspired pictures, and engaged in debates over chips and salsa versus pumpkin spice, it left me somewhat uncertain. I noticed a friend posting pictures of her fall wardrobe, complete with plaid skirts and pumpkin-colored dresses, and another wearing flannel. I wondered if I was ready for the transition, as I still sported shorts and sundresses with sun-kissed skin. My husband hung up our Autumn wreath and surprised me with a bouquet of sunflowers. I heard Autumn beckoning me, assuring me that I belonged in this season. The birds and squirrels seemed to concur as they went about their preparations, and farmers worked tirelessly in the fields. I could almost hear the angels singing. God whispered to me, "This season is for you as well. You belong in this time, from the beginning of time to its end. Come, dance with me." I felt the leaves crunch beneath my tennis shoes, the breeze brushing against my shoulder, and my husband's love as we decorated the house and simmered apple, cinnamon, and vanilla potpourri on the stove. "Join me in the soothing lullaby of the Harvest," God urged, "I have provided for you, and I want to fill you with joy that will spill over to others. This is a season of celebration, solace, and remembrance." Amidst the wind, songs, and devotions, I reminded myself to remember God's goodness. He had chosen and treasured me. Autumn was a time for both Harvest and the preparation of our hearts through gratitude and remembrance. It marked the beginning of the Holy Days, tracing back to an exodus that continued to shape our lives, leading us to the most significant event in human history—the birth of our Lord Jesus, which ultimately led to redemption. So, I took the leap, embraced this Harvest season, and donned a rust, gold, and cream dress. Walking the path near my home, I inhaled deeply, resting in God's love for me. The warmth of the sun caressed me, and I felt immense comfort. There was a change in the air, and a full, radiant moon graced the sky. I rejoiced in the moment, knowing that it was a privilege to be alive. Down the path, as sunlight filtered through the trees, I noticed some leaves beginning to change. It was a symphony of colors and transformation, a masterpiece crafted by God Himself. But I wondered, how do we, as God's people, navigate this sacred season? It was a time for thanksgiving, rejoicing, and gratitude, as seasons always brought transformation. This particular change, however, was God's reminder to remember His goodness during the Autumn of our lives, preparing us for the Winter ahead. The bountiful Harvest sustained us during leaner times, both spiritually and physically. God's wisdom in leading us through the cycles of nature mirrored the seasons of our lives, and together, we walked hand in hand. "O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever" (Psalm 136:1 KJV). Autumn served as a season of Remembrance, where we acknowledged God's blessings and praised Him for His goodness. His grace flowed not because of our deeds but because He was inherently good. We remembered: Our eternal journey, regardless of our circumstances. Heaven as a place of abundance and plenty. Past blessings and God's faithfulness in providing. Gratitude for daily blessings, recognizing that God's goodness extended to the ordinary. Living in a state of thanksgiving, finding joy in it all. Autumn was a delicious season of Harvest, when leaves fell and we reaped what we had sown. It was a season to hold onto faith and believe in God's promise that it would be beautiful. For it was a privilege to be alive, and I vowed to make every day count. This seasonal display was orchestrated by God and always arrived as a reminder: God remained in control. His nature was unchanging. His power extended over all creation as the Creator and Artist behind all this beauty. Remembering God's goodness in Autumn prepared us for Winter. The abundance of the Harvest sustained us during leaner times. God had provided us with this beautiful planet, the gift of breath and life. Shifting our hearts towards gratitude helped us remember that when Winter came, we needed to have faith and trust that God was still in control. Just as the leaves fell and lay dormant in Winter, they would burst forth with life in Spring, mirroring the resurrection of Jesus and the eventual celebration of all Creation. A Harvest Prayer Dear Heavenly Father, We thank you for the Sacred Seasons, both in nature and in our lives. These transformations, seen in the changing leaves and bountiful Harvest, remind us of your presence. May we gather together in your name, whether at our tables, pumpkin patches, or football games. May we encounter you in every aspect of the changing seasons, for everything has its time. Thank you for your boundless love and for including us in the magnificent transformation of life itself. May we share your love with everyone we meet as we prepare for the greatest gift of all—the celebration of the birth of Jesus. Thank you, God, for equipping us and all of Creation for Winter in the dance of Autumn. In Jesus's name, Amen. Deborah Rutherford is a Christian wife who loves to write stories, devotionals, and poetry. She is also an award-winning makeup artist. Deborah shares her journey of faith, joy, and beauty on her blog at www.deborahrutherford.com and social media. She is a contributing writer for Aletheia Today Magazine , Kingdom Edge Magazine and Gracefully Truthful Ministries and has a devotional in the book “Shepherd on Duty: Promises of God you Can Trust ” (Arabelle Publishing) and the Calla Press, Literary Journal Spring 2023. Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Previous Next

< Back Imagination Please Fr. Timothy Joyce, OSB, STL "One way helpful in recovering the wonder of childhood and a simpler life, is to become more creative, imaginative, wonder-filled people again." A very young woman and man are gazing down on their newborn child. Their faces are full of awe and wonder, full of delight and total satisfaction. This is the picture I recently saw, two young parents and their child. Is this the image of the child that Jesus holds up as a sign of the kingdom of heaven? I love gazing into the eyes of a newborn baby – there is the depth of eternity in their eyes. They seem to still remember from where they came. It is before the competitiveness, the insecurity to prove oneself and the constant need to be reassured set in. It is also before the child is swept into the consumeristic world of the need to identify oneself by acquiring more and bigger things, things outside of them and outside relationships. A child can play in a sandbox, can use empty boxes to build a new world. Their world is simple. Why do our worlds become so complicated? We seem to lose our contentment with the world God has given us – the beauty and wonder of nature, the value of good friends, the ability to share what we have with brothers, sisters and all those in need? We turn a world of plenty into a world of scarcity. Jesus, in the gospels, keep directing us to seek another, a simpler way. Today’s culture puts all the reliance on oneself to find meaning alone. The way of faith puts one’s faith, confidence, trust, in a force and energy beyond us which we find together. We call this power beyond us the Divine. One way helpful in recovering the wonder of childhood and a simpler life, is to become more creative, imaginative, wonder-filled people again. There are two ways that I follow. The first is to get back into harmony with nature; we are not here on earth to dominate, control and amass all creation but to be in union with creation, with each other, with myself, and with God. And we can begin with all of creation which teaches us so much. I love the words of Job to his accusers and I can hear these words addressed to all of us. “Ask the beasts and they will teach you; the birds of the air and they will tell you; ask the plants of the earth and they will teach you; and the fish of the sea will declare to you. Who among these does not know that the hand of the Lord has done this? In God’s hand is the life every living thing, and the breath of ever Being.” (Book of Job12:7-10). Our culture is really out of sync with such a belief. Rather, we are taught the ways of greed, accumulation, consumerism, build bigger and better than my neighbor. Our imagination can show us another way. Yes, we can talk with animals; yes they have feeling; yes they can teach us many things. The Celtic Saints give many examples of oneness with the created world. The second area that abets simplification and imagination is how we use the great gift of our mind. The liberal arts curricular are dying. Some lament the “dumbing of America.” Many young people seek jobs with computers. This is fine but machines can give us facts; they do not help us to think and imagine. Years ago, the great Rabbi Joshua Abraham Heschel counseled all of us to be reading two books at a time – one serious and the other, a playful, imaginative book, a novel. Our right brain can atrophy when it is not fed with novels, poetry, music, games, sport, dancing, art and architecture. Jesus said that unless we become like little children, we shall not enter the kingdom of heaven. We need a child’s playfulness, its sense of awe and wonder. Smart phones and other devices can support our growth in knowledge but they also can inhibit the growth of the Imagination. Reading the Bible needs imagination as the texts are full of stories, myths, poetry and Old Testament types. In monastic lectio divina this is formative reading in contrast to ordinary informative reading such as a text book or newspaper. All this also applies to our life of worship in churches and synagogues. Is it little wonder that many are bored with public worship? They give it up or choose their own spiritual path based on what appeals to them. People need beauty to uplift us. So much of church art, music and decorum is retrograde European. Native peoples often have more lively worship with authentic indigenous art and music. Maybe it starts with the fact that we had become accustomed to quiet and passive worship. But music is not a frill for worship; it is an essential part of it. The biblical religions all pray the psalms which are meant to be sung. Reading the Bible needs imagination as the texts are full of stories, myths, poetry and Old Testament types. In monastic lectio divina this is formative reading in contrast to ordinary informative reading such as a text book or newspaper. Good sculpture, art, color, and bodily expression are also all part of a more imaginative approach to religion. Along with paying attention to what we read and look at, there is always need for silence in our daily lives. Only with a habit of silence can we really listen to the deeper sounds of life, of reality, of God. There is so much to learn, so much that is there to inspire us. Smart phones have their place but not as you are walking in a park or sitting still. We have eyes to see, and ears to hear, and noses to smell, and everything to touch but we have to be still and listen to it all. In a train station or airport or just walking in the city, I behold the great variety of people: how they move, talk, exude joy or fatigue. So much of wonder before me. I echo Louie Armstrong’s song, “What a Wonderful World.” Have you learned any of this on your own and chosen to live more imaginably and creatively? You can let us know at joycet@glastonburyabbey.org Please note that I do not speak on behalf of Glastonbury Abbey, the Archdiocese of Boston or the Catholic Church, though I hope my faith is in harmony with all these. Any error in judgment should be credited to me and not anyone else. Republished with minimal edits and permission rom glastonburyabbey.org . Fr. Timothy Joyce, OSB, STL continues his regular blog, “ Monastic Scribe ”, where he reflects on "what I may have learned from all these years and what I am still trying to learn." Fr. Timothy notes, “I do not speak on behalf of Glastonbury Abbey, the Archdiocese of Boston or the Catholic Church, though I hope my faith is in harmony with all these. Any error in judgment should be credited to me and not anyone else.” purpose and devotion. Return to our 2024 Beach Read Previous Next

< Back Who Are the Antichrist, the ‘Man of Lawlessness’, and the Beast? Ian Paul "Clever schemes and novel doctrines won't save us. Stay faithful to the truth of God in Jesus and live with confidence, even in these shaky times." For those engaged in end-times speculation, whether provoked by the Covid-19 pandemic, global warming, or war in Ukraine, there has been another rash of speculation about the identity of the Antichrist—that end times personal figure who is now somewhere secretly in the world but who will very soon be revealed. (It is worth noting, for the sake of perspective, that every perceived crisis since at least the 1960s has provoked such speculation. For earlier modern end-times expectation, see the example of the followers of William Miller , who predicted that Jesus would return in 1844.) I am not sure that anything I write here will persuade those committed to end-times schemes, in which the Book of Revelation predicts in detail our age alone (as if we are the most important generation that ever lived), but I think a lot of ordinary readers of the Bible are unsettled by such theories, and are not sure how to respond. Part of the reason for this is that such schemes look so coherent. Here is one, influential, example , part of Dispensational Premillennialism based on the teaching of J N Darby : The man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12 is the Antichrist who will come on the world scene at the beginning of the Day of the Lord. This Day, sometimes called the “end times,” starts after the rapture of the church in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:1–11 ). It is good to note that the Day of the Lord is not a twenty-four-hour period of time; rather, it is an extended period of time that includes the seven-year tribulation, the return of Christ to put down all rebellion against Him, the 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth, the final defeat of Satan, and the Great White Throne Judgment. This looks very convincing—until you realise that the coherence of this scheme belongs entirely to the writer, and bears little or no relation to what the Bible actually says! The New Testament nowhere identifies the ‘man of lawlessness’ with the ‘antichrist’; it does not describe a ‘rapture’ of the church ( this arises from a poor misreading of 1 Thessalonians 4 ); nowhere does the NT mention a ‘ seven-year tribulation ‘; the 1,000-year reign of Christ is a literal reading of a symbolic text in Rev 20; and the ‘Day of the Lord’ which is everywhere in the NT described as a specific moment at the end of history has now been extended, in this scheme, to a period of more than 1,007 years! One of the key proponents of this kind of scheme in a previous generation, Hal Lindsay (who wrote The Late, Great Planet Earth ) actually admits that this is a ‘hopscotch’ approach to reading the Bible, taking one bit from one place and another from another in order to put together a picture like assembling the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. But look at the wonderful picture that results, is his defence! So it is worth noting from the outset the basic assumptions of this kind of approach. First, the Bible doesn’t actually make sense as a narrative as it is written; it needs some mysterious key to open up its meaning. Secondly, the truth about the ‘end times’ and Jesus’ return is a great big puzzle, and the truth of what will happen has been missed by most people in history—indeed, it continues to be missed by most people who simply read the Bible. Thirdly, we therefore need an authority figure who will help us put together the different pieces of the otherwise unintelligible text of the Bible, and we then find what we need to know not in reading the Bible, but in reading the writings and teaching of this important person. All these features make this approach perfect for an age of conspiracy theories—and offer a potential publishing bonanza, since all faithful Christians will need to buy their book! The best answer to all this is to return to the text, and what it actually says. So let’s look at the text of the Bible, and the passages about each of these three figures, and see what we can learn. The ‘man of lawlessness’ is only mentioned in one short passage, 2 Thess 2.1–12 . Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendour of his coming. The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness. There are some things here worth noting. First, Paul clearly thinks that, whoever this mysterious ‘man of lawlessness’ (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας) is, he is ‘already at work’. This is clear from the fact that he ‘will set himself up in the temple’ which was still standing when Paul was writing (I am convinced by the arguments that 1 and 2 Thessalonians are early, are by Paul and not forgeries, and were written in quick succession to one another); there is no suggestion whatever in the text that ‘the temple’ here is used symbolically to refer to the people of God. Something is currently holding him back—and he is clearly a human figure, and not an angelic or demonic power. Secondly, Paul is referring rather obliquely and in summary form to something that he has explained in more detail to the Thessalonians, and we will never know the full explanation that he has already given. Like many issues in Paul, we wish that he has said more! But we need to face the reality that we do not know any more details, so have to decide whether it is worth speculating. But thirdly, and in answer to the dilemma of our ignorance, we can know the purpose of Paul’s teaching in this area—and it is not in order to encourage speculation or the drawing up of end-times calendars! On this, I think John Piper’s exposition is really helpful: But persecution and suffering are not the only issue at Thessalonica, and Paul, now in chapters 2 and 3, takes his instruction about the second coming to a new level of detail in dealing with this second issue. The issue is that some in the church have ceased to do their ordinary vocational jobs, and started to make a nuisance of themselves as busybodies, mooching off the other Christians, since they’re not earning any money. And evidently, though Paul doesn’t say so explicitly, this delinquency is owing to a kind of hysteria in the community that the day of the Lord is not just near, but is already present. In other words, Paul is saying to them: don’t panic; you have not been left behind; there is no need to speculate; get on with living your lives, working with your hands, instead of dropping everything for the sake of end-times speculation. You can trust God who will ultimately triumph, no matter how bad things appear to be getting. As Martin Luther is believed to have said, ‘If I knew Jesus was coming tomorrow, I would still collect the rent and plant an apple tree’. Or we might say ‘Jesus is coming; look busy!’ It is also worth noting that this is a very minor point in Paul’s teaching about ‘the end times’. In Romans 8, he talks about the longing of the created order to be redeemed; in 1 Cor 15, he offers a long and detailed discussion about the implications of the resurrection at the end; all through his writings there is a constant sense of expectation, and the hope that confidence in the ultimate victory of God in the return of Jesus. And yet, only in this one passage is the ‘man of lawlessness’ mentioned. So it can hardly be claimed to be central to Paul’s teaching. The ‘antichrist’ is only mentioned in four verses in the NT, all in the letters of John: Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22 …but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. 1 John 4:3 Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 7 Again, there are several things worth noticing simply by reading the text carefully. First, although the author does talk about ‘ the antichrist’ at several points, he is also clear that there have and continue to be many such people. Many ‘antichrists’ have already come; every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is of the antichrist, and ‘any such person’ who denies Jesus came in the flesh ‘is the antichrist’. Secondly, the eschatology of these passages is highly ‘realised’—that is, the writer talks as though he and his readers are already in the ‘end times’ when he says several times ‘it is the last hour’. This might look as though there was an expectation that Jesus would return in his lifetime, an expectation that was mistaken. But in fact it matches the language of the Fourth Gospel, which talks about ‘life of the age [to come]’ or ‘eternal life’ as though is starts now, rather than being something we have to wait for. This also agrees with Peter on the day of Pentecost, who quotes Joel 2’s description of the ‘last days’ and says that it is what is happening in the outpouring of the Spirit (‘This is that… Acts 2.16 ). And it agrees with Paul’s description of those who put their faith in Jesus: ‘If anyone is in Christian there is new creation’ ( 2 Cor 5.17 ). Thirdly, the concern here is (once more) nothing to do with ‘end times’ speculation and timetables, but to do with sound doctrine. The writer is encouraging his readers to stay true to the faith. Overall, the letters of John have two concerns: that his audience hold onto the truth about Jesus, and that they live out that truth in lives of love. We also need to note that the description of [the, many] antichrist[s] appears to have little or nothing in common with Paul’s description of the ‘man of lawlessness’ other than the theme of ‘deception’ and the concern that the believers should not be deceived by those who do not tell the truth. This is hardly a concern uniquely related to the ‘end times’…! With mentions in four verses, in two short circular letters, again this is hardly central to the theological concerns of the writers of the NT overall. Lastly, the beast is a central figure in the drama of the Book of Revelation. Although there are anticipations of the figure earlier in the text, the ‘beast from the sea’ is fully introduced in Rev 13 as one of an ‘evil trinity’ along with the dragon/Satan, and the ‘beast from the earth’ ( Rev 13.1 ) which later in the text is described as ‘the false prophet’. The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast. People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can make war against it?” ( Rev 13.1–4 ) The beast from the sea look very much like the dragon which is described in chapter 12—and both together combine the features of the four beasts that emerge from the sea in Daniel 7, which many commentators believe symbolise the four great world empires of Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome. And far from making this beast future and mysterious, he appears to go to some lengths to help his readers understand who this beast is, by asking them to ‘calculate’ (the Greek term psephizo ) or work out, the number of the beast, which stands for a man’s name. For some time, there has been a strong scholarly consensus that 666 refers to Nero by means of a numerology known as gematria or isopsephism —adding the value of the letters in a word so that every word has a value, and equating two words with equal value. We know that Nero’s name was sometimes spelled with a final -n; ‘Neron Caesar’ when written in Greek, but transliterated into Hebrew letters adds up to 666 (see the image to the right for the sums). There are several significant pieces of supporting evidence for this. First, when you write the Greek for ‘beast’, therion, in Hebrew letters, you also arrive at 666, making it clear that 666 is the number of ‘the beast’. Secondly, when you do the same with ‘angel’ in Rev 21, you get the number 144. Third, an early manuscript from Oxyrhynchus in Egypt corrects 666 to 616, which you would do if you understood the gematria, but thought that ‘Nero’ should be spelled without the final n. (There isn’t really any other plausible explanation for why this variant should arise.) This ‘beast’ is identified with neither the ‘man of lawlessness’ in Paul nor the ‘antichrist’ in John, and in fact neither of these terms occur anywhere in Revelation. So where does this all get us? First, it is clear that the three terms belong to quite different traditions within the NT, and none of these three traditions attempts to make any specific connections with the others in terms of language—despite the fact that the later writers (of the Johannine letters and of the Book of Revelation) almost certainly knew Paul’s writings. But it is also clear that there is some kind of connection, particularly since the concern of all three writers appears to be to encourage his readers to stand firm in the truth of the apostolic teaching in the face of pressures from outside the Jesus community to renounce faith and pressures from within to distort the truth about Jesus. Here, Piper makes an interesting observation, but I think then reaches the wrong conclusion from it: Therefore, the man of lawlessness will be unparalleled in his ability to deceive, as 2 Thessalonians 2:10 says, “with all wicked deception for those who are perishing.” It really could be “in all deception of unrighteousness,” because we are going to see in just a moment that the way he deceives is by making unrighteousness seem pleasurable. (Notice how the word adikia is repeated in verses 10 and 12.) Again, I would argue, Paul is unpacking the prophecies made by Jesus. Jesus said, Then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. . . . For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. . . . So, if they say to you, “Look, he [one person!] is in the wilderness,” do not go out. If they say, “Look, he is in the inner rooms,” do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. ( Matthew 24:21 , 24 , 26–27 ) At the close of this climactic period of lawlessness and a great deception led by a person, Paul is saying, the coming of the Son of Man will be unmistakable. Like lightning flashing from horizon to horizon. Piper is noting the connections between Paul’s language in 2 Thess and Jesus’ teaching in the first half Matt 24. But what he does not notice is that Jesus’ teaching here is not about the distant (for him) future and a remote ‘end times’ that we might be living in, but what the disciples he is teaching will face in their lifetime . He makes this crystal clear by stating emphatically: Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. ( Matt 24.34 ). It is only in the second half of the chapter, from Matt 24.36 , that Jesus turns his attention to issues around ‘the end of the age’. There are connections too between Paul’s discussion of the man of lawlessness, who will ‘use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie’ ( 2 Thess 2.9 ) and the ‘signs and wonders’ performed by the second beast on behalf of the first in Rev 13.13–14 , but this is a description of magical tricks and propaganda performed by Roman rulers of which we have documentary evidence. In other words, both Paul and John are writing about things already happening in the world of their readers. The concern of all these texts is to encourage their readers: don’t be deceived by clever schemes and novel doctrines; don’t get caught up in ‘end-times’ speculation; stay faithful to the truth that God came to us in Jesus, and has made our salvation secure in him; and continue to live lives of industry, generosity and grace as you wait with confidence for his return in a world that is looking very shaky. We need the same encouragement! To find out more about what the NT says about eschatology, the end of the world, and living in hope, you might be interested in my Grove booklet on Kingdom, Hope and the End of the World . To find out more about how to read the Book of Revelation, see my Grove booklet or my commentary on Revelation in IVP’s Tyndale series . The image at the top is a detail of The Deeds of Antichrist by Luca Signorelli (1505). Published previously. This is a republished blog in full agreement with www.psephizo.com , the official website of autor Ian Paul. Ian Paul is a theologian, author, speaker, and academic consultant. He serves as Adjunct Professor for Fuller Theological Seminary ; Associate Minister for St Nic's, Nottingham , and Managing Editor for Grove Books . He is member of General Synod, a Mac user, and a chocoholic. He tweets at @psephizo . For a complete list of books he has either written or contributed to, go to https://www.psephizo.com/publications/ . Return to our Harvest Issue 2023 Previous Next

< Back Bending With Angels, Resting in the Wait of Christmas Deborah Rutherford "In the silence of time, God's chosen ones fervently pray "Messiah" on their lips as it was in olden times and is now. "Come, Lord Jesus!" "Come again, Lord Jesus!" How can we know that morning is still coming on the darkest day, the shortest one, which feels 400 years long? This year, the Winter Solstice occurs on December 21st, 2024. On the Winter Solstice, our earth about stops as we step into a deep dark. This signals the beginning of winter where barren trees are asleep along with many of the animals. Resting creation. Does this call for us to rest? But do we stop? Isn't it our human tendency at this time of the year to be quite busy, and might stopping be counterproductive? The liturgical rhythms of the hours, tides, seasons, and the liturgical church calendar are God's sacred time. We are invited to draw near to God's heart and embrace our covenant with our Heavenly Father. To rest in Him. We are living in the in-between, a luminal space between our born Savior and our resurrected King Jesus coming again, our earthen existence and our eternal home. Our world circles around to the birth of Christ each year, as it has throughout the ages. It is a time when creation holds its breath on the darkest night in anticipation of God’s holy splendor. Do we hold our breath too? Wondering: Will the Star shine in the night? Will the Angels bend for us, too, with their harps of gold? Will Jesus come, again? In anticipation we wait, and in the dark, the silence, the pause, the rest, God asks, "Do you believe?" “Do you trust me?” This is a yearly moment of trusting in the dark, where we repeatedly experience the Holy story: the immaculate conception, the miracle birth, and the proclamation to all men that God has peace for us and a Savior. God has come to us. God takes us with Him on the Cross. God gives us resurrection. God in the flesh, Emmanuel. In the silence of time, God's chosen ones fervently pray "Messiah" on their lips as it was in olden times and is now. "Come, Lord Jesus!" "Come again, Lord Jesus! Where a God so loved the world that with a promise that began in the garden: “He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel,” (Genesis 3 NKJV), comes to fruition in a stable in Bethlehem when a babe was born unto a virgin, a promise proclaimed to shepherds nearby in a field, a promise proclaimed across the ages and a promise that continues today when our King Jesus returns. This is the reassurance of God's enduring promises, a source of comfort and security in the darkest days. How do we hang on to the joy of Christmas during the darkest day when we may, for a moment, hold our breath? Can we rest in God when there are packages to wrap, candles to light, and cookies to bake? How do we wait in the luminal space of the in-between? On the darkest day, when the Winter Solstice comes, although we know surely Christmas is coming, here are Five ways to intentionally bend with the Angels: READ: Set aside time to read the Holy Stories from Luke 1-2 and Matthew 1-2. This is best done with the whole family. Invite the wonder of what the shepherds were experiencing. What was Mary pondering? What was Joseph thinking? Inhale and exhale your breath slowly and read: "Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.” And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying: “Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!” Luke 2:8-14 NKJV WORSHIP of our Lord Jesus is what we were made to do. Just as the Angels came in song and proclamation, so do we. Make a Spotify playlist of your favorite Christmas songs and play them all day long. Grab a guitar with a fire glowing and like the Angels sing! PRAYER is where we meet with our Holy Father because we do not have to wait to be with Him. We can be with Jesus right now. God can always be with us, in the past, present, and future. He is in our presence now. We are welcome in His throne room. We can meet with the Lord privately and share family prayers with each other. REST: On this darkest day of the year, rest in God's promise that He is coming again and ponder, as Mary did after giving birth to Jesus. How can we not stop thinking about Jesus and all He has done for us? How can we not tell? We are part of the greatest story ever told; now, let's go tell it. HOPE: We, ourselves, or those we know may be going through dark times, a season of suffering, loneliness, or shaken faith. Let's hold on to our hope and joy this Christmas season because we have a God who loves us. We have his Peace. We have Jesus. This may be the start of winter, but it also means more sunlight is coming. This reflects the light of our Lord breaking through into the darkness. Shine as His stars in today's Christmas sky to guide fellow brethren homeward bound. Just as Jesus is the light in the darkness, so are we. This is how we rest in the wait of Christmas. A Christmas Prayer: Dear Heavenly Father, thank you for bending low to be with us and coming to us in human flesh, our Savior Jesus Christ. Oh, what a glorious day! We will celebrate this Christmas when the brightest light awakens the dark and forever changes our lives. We wait in anticipation for You, our resurrected King, to come. Thank you for coming on the darkest day to our weary world. No day is too dark for you! In Jesus' name, Amen. Deborah Rutherford is a Christian wife who loves to write stories, devotionals, and poetry. She is also an award-winning makeup artist. Deborah shares her journey of faith, joy, and beauty on her blog at www.deborahrutherford.com and social media. She is a contributing writer for Aletheia Today Magazine , Kingdom Edge Magazine and Gracefully Truthful Ministries and has a devotional in the book “Shepherd on Duty: Promises of God you Can Trust ” (Arabelle Publishing) and the Calla Press, Literary Journal Spring 2023. Return to Yuletide 2024 Previous Next

< Back Comfort for Clumsy Believers: What the Disbelief of the Disciples Means for Us Deidre Braley "There is evidence that, in the backs of the disciples' minds, there was always the glimmer of the same question that shimmers on my frontal lobe today: 'But what if we’ve gotten it all wrong about him?'" Every quarter or so, I have an existential crisis. It’s not something I typically bring up in conversation; it turns out that questions like, “What if everything we’ve believed about God and the universe is wrong?” tend to dampen the overall mood of dinner parties and coffee dates. Plus, it just isn’t polite Christian talk. Nobody wants to hear the late night doubts of a so-called believer—least of all me . These questions are unwelcome; these doubts, disturbing. But I’ve found comfort as of late in the recountings of Jesus’ death and resurrection in the Gospels. For the first time in all of my rereadings, it’s striking me that the disciples really didn’t understand the entirety of what Jesus was up to and who he was. There is evidence that, in the backs of their minds, there was always the glimmer of the same question that shimmers on my frontal lobe today: “But what if we’ve gotten it all wrong about him?” How have I missed it until now? How did I not see that these men—just like me—grappled with the pesky whispers that poked and prodded at the foundations of their faith, their security, their eternal futures ? I’ve always assumed that since they knew Jesus personally, it was a given that they also understood he was really the Son of God. That every moment they were in his presence, his essence of saving grace would be so palpable that they’d know for sure who they were dealing with. That there would be no way they could touch and see, eat and banter with Jesus himself and still hold on to any shred of disbelief that mumbled, “Maybe he’s just a really good guy. A stellar prophet. Ten out of ten, as far as leaders go.” The Disbelief of the Disciples But looking around at Jesus’ closest handful of friends in the days surrounding his death and resurrection, we see a group of people thrown into the confusing waters of uncertainty, fear, and doubt. Judas acts a traitor. Simon Peter denies knowing him. The disciples in the upper room refuse to believe Mary when she tells them Jesus has left the tomb. The men on the road to Emmaus can’t even see past their discouraged hopes to realize that Jesus himself is walking alongside them. In short, even though they knew Jesus and he’d told them exactly what would happen, they still couldn’t seem to bring themselves to the point of certain, unwavering belief. Doubt is often seen as a character flaw. Society loves the certain. But maybe certainty is such a hot commodity because it’s what we all actually lack, addled by our own human condition. The disciple, too, were humans, and I see now that they each struggled with varying degrees of disbelief. What is significant to each of their stories does not turn out to be their level of dubiety, though—it is the way they end up responding to their natural predisposition to doubt. Judas, for example, is consumed by his disbelief. I have always wondered how he possibly could have betrayed Jesus, knowing he was the Son of God. Because honestly, how did he think that was going to work out for him? But now it strikes me: he didn’t know it, not really. If he had, he never would have traded him for thirty pieces of silver. He would have understood he was making a preposterous exchange (a bagful of coins for the Savior of the world) and that his treachery would have eternal consequences. My theory is that it wasn’t about the silver at all; it was about the fact that he heard the crowds all around him saying, “He is not who he says he is,” and allowed them to feed the doubts that niggled there in his soul. You can almost hear the snake in the Garden whispering the same lie in Judas’ ear that worked with Adam and Eve: “Did he really say that?” Judas justified his betrayal by shaking his head alongside the others, letting the disquiet of his disbelief overwhelm even the intimacy, miracles, and teachings he’d experienced in his close walk with Jesus. It isn’t only Judas, though, who questions the truth of Jesus’ words. Before it happened and on multiple occasions, Jesus himself had explicitly told his disciples that he would be mocked and shamed, beaten and killed, and then would rise on the third day. But it is written, “...they understood none of these things. This saying was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what was said” (Luke 18:34). This proves to be true, for on the day of Jesus’ resurrection, when Mary and the other women burst in to tell the eleven that the tomb was empty, Luke says, “these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them” (24:11). And when a disguised Jesus meets the two men on the way to Emmaus and asks why they look so sad, they respond, “...we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel” (Luke 24:21). The unspoken implication is obvious here: But he wasn’t. It is clear that belief and doubt had done battle in their souls; their belief had told them that Jesus was the Messiah, while their doubt had told them he was just a man. In his death, disbelief had won, and the men succumbed to despair. A Closer Look at Simon Peter Simon Peter was not immune to doubt either. He walked on the water to Jesus, yes, but he also began to sink the moment he saw the wind and the waves. And later, his three denials of Jesus are evidence that he did not have enough faith to stand against the enormous fear mounting within and around him. And yet, throughout the Gospels we see Simon Peter among the first to surrender to belief. At Caesarea Philippi, Simon Peter confesses that Jesus is “the Christ, “the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). On the mountain with Jesus during the Transfiguration, he is the one to (albeit awkwardly) embrace the seemingly-impossible fact that Moses and Elijah are there too; he offers to set up a tent for each of them (Matthew 17:4). When the other disciples balk at the notion that Jesus has risen, Simon Peter dashes from the room and arrives in breathless wonder to see the folded linens for himself (Matthew 24:12). And when the resurrected Jesus later appears on the beach where they are fishing, he is the first to recognize him as Lord and jump in the water in his haste to get to him (John 21:7). Simon Peter is not set apart in these stories because of his absence of disbelief or his stunning quality of character. In fact, he seems like a bit of a hothead—rash and impulsive and imperfect as any of us. But now I see that his superpower is his utter willingness to surrender to belief and, like a clumsy jump off the high-dive, to submerge himself in holy mystery. It’s not always pretty and he doesn’t always stick the landing, but he does keep jumping. Comfort for Clumsy Believers I’m comforted to know that those who walked with Jesus—who heard things of heaven directly from the Master’s mouth—also struggled against insidious doubt. I’m even more comforted by Jesus’ response to their clumsy attempts at belief. On the road to Emmaus, he admonishes the two disheartened men, saying, “‘O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?’” (Luke 24: 26). But he doesn’t leave them there; he goes on to interpret “to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (v.27)—starting all the way back at the beginning as if to gently lead their analytical minds into the territory of total belief. And to Thomas who says, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe” (John 20:24), Jesus appears and lets him do just that, as if to say, “I know this handicap you’re working with—humanity—is a tricky, finicky thing. Come, let me lead you to belief.” He helps his friends believe with their minds and their physical beings, appealing to wherever the incredulity has laid siege. He encourages them to touch, think, and feel. He helps them do whatever it takes to clear the shared hurdle of humanity: a quizzical nature. I have to believe that if there was grace for them, there is also grace for us clumsy believers—the ones who are troubled with unwelcomed doubts as we lay awake at night, and who sometimes tremble under the weight of our own existential crises. But let’s also take inspiration from Simon Peter. He was sifted by the devil and, like so many of us, heard the echoes of the original lie reverberating in his eardrums. But instead of letting disbelief win out, he still jumps out of the boat. He still lunges toward his Lord. When the enemy and all the world cry, “Is he really who he says he is?” Simon Peter waves them off as if to say, “Yes—he is I AM. And I am here for it.” Jesus responds to his friends’ varied degrees of doubt with tenderness and grace. He is not surprised by their disbelief, nor does he turn away because of it. But as Thomas puts his fingers into his wounds, Jesus does say, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (John 20:29). Remember—it is not our disbelief that defines our faith, but rather how we choose to respond to it. So the next time we find ourselves in the turbulent waters of late-night doubting, we needn’t give in to despair, nor chastise ourselves for having questions. Instead, we can consider ourselves normal, and then remember that our response is what drives the narrative. Judas had doubts and betrayed the Savior of the world. Simon Peter had doubts, and Jesus gave him the keys to the kingdom. The difference? Judas leaned into disbelief of what he couldn’t see, while Simon Peter leapt into the mystery. Let us be followers who, addled with doubt though we are, choose to keep jumping from the boat, to keep lunging toward our Lord, and to keep on believing what we can’t see. It is our willingness to surrender to belief that will ultimately define our faith. Deidre Braley is a freelance writer and editor. She lives in Maine with her husband and two children, and most days can be found savoring an overly cheesy bagel or drinking a second cup of coffee while working on her weekly newsletter, The Second Cup . She is a strong believer in the power of poetry, picking roadside flowers, and blowing past small talk at all costs. Follow her on Instagram @deidresecondcup or on Facebook — she loves meeting new friends. Return to our Holy Days Table of Contents Previous Next

"Faith is not belief without evidence; it's the content of a relationship with God and is based upon the private experience of God's love." < Back Faith Is Not Belief Without Evidence Joseph Hinman Jan 15, 2024 "Faith is not belief without evidence; it's the content of a relationship with God and is based upon the private experience of God's love." I am tired of hearing atheists say "faith is believing things without evidence." No definition of faith in Christianity says that. Let's Get this out of the way up front. Heb 11:1: faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument (argumentum) of things that are not apparent. Most translations say "evidence of things not seen."This does not say faith is belief without evidence it says faith itself is a kind of evidence because it points to the reality that caused one to have faith. The most important dictionary in theology is the Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology. There are two kinds, one for theologians and one for ideas. Let's consult the latter. faith (Gr. pistis, Lat. fides, “trust,” “belief”) In Christianity, belief, trust, and obedience to God as revealed in Jesus Christ. It is the means of salvation (Eph. 2:8–9) or eternal life (John 6:40). Faith affects all dimensions of one’s existence: intellect, emotions, and will. See also salvation.[1] According to that definition there is nothing like a lack of evidence. There Is no hint that faith involves a lack of evidence. Consulting the same source for different uses of the term "faith:" Faith, explicit (Lat. fides explicita) Faith in that of which one has knowledge. Thus the term may be understood as referring to what one professes to believe because of what is known.[2] Here faith is equated with knowledge. Since evidence involves knowledge and builds on knowledge it would seem that faith is actually dependent upon evidence rather than being without it. Faith, implicit (Lat. fides implicita) The Roman Catholic view that one believes as true “what the church believes,” even without certain knowledge. It was rejected by the Protestant Reformers as a true faith because the element of knowledge was lacking.[3] The Catholic view seems closer to being without evidence, but not an exact fit. In any case that view was rejected by the reformers and is not really compatible with the Protestant view.The Protestant view rests upon knowledge, which again, would have to involve evidence at some point. Thus direct contradiction to the atheist bromide. Then we turn to the protestant notion of "saving faith." That is faith that saves. Remember Paul tells us salvation is by Grace through faith:“For by grace you have been saved through faith” (Ephesians 2:8).[4] Faith, saving. The gift of God through the Holy Spirit whereby one accepts and believes the promises of the Gospel as the reception of salvation through the life and the work of Jesus Christ. One is incorporated into Christ, participates in his benefits, and is an heir of eternal life. [4] No indication is given that there is no preliminary basis for belief which might involve evidence.Before one can trust God one must believe that God is. None of these definitions preclude basing that initial belief upon evidence. It is after one accepts the conviction that God is real that faith might supersede evidence in matters such as trusting God for salvation. Let's turn to some major figures in Christian theology to see if they define faith as belief without evidence: St. Augustine Faith, to Augustine, is a humble posture of seeking and confession, in which the individual confesses their sin and brokenness before God, and by his Grace, is cleansed. The individual surrenders to the God who is already present in the soul. This initial work begins the process of cleansing the soul so that it can see clearly. As the individual continues to seek God, the soul is continually cleansed as a gracious process, which slowly flakes away the filth of the Fall. Augustine believed that much could be known through Platonic meditation: eternal things and God’s presence could be apprehended, but God could be known only for a moment.[5] Thomas Aquinas Popular accounts of religion sometimes construe faith as a blind, uncritical acceptance of myopic doctrine. According to Richard Dawkins, “faith is a state of mind that leads people to believe something—it doesn’t matter what—in the total absence of supporting evidence...Such a view of faith might resonate with contemporary skeptics of religion. But as we shall see, this view is not remotely like the one Aquinas—or historic Christianity for that matter—endorses. To begin with, Aquinas takes faith to be an intellectual virtue or habit, the object of which is God (ST IIaIIae 1.1; 4.2). There are other things that fall under the purview of faith, such as the doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation. But we do not affirm these specific doctrines unless they have some relation to God. According to Aquinas, these doctrines serve to explicate God’s nature and provide us with a richer understanding of the one in whom our perfect happiness consists (Ibid.).[6] Here again knowledge, an intellectual thing, compatible with evidence. How could faith be based upon knowledge and be an intellectual act and yet without evidence? By intellectual he means one consciously assents to belief. Marin Luther ... faith is God's work in us, that changes us and gives new birth from God. (John 1:13). It kills the Old Adam and makes us completely different people. It changes our hearts, our spirits, our thoughts and all our powers. It brings the Holy Spirit with it. Yes, it is a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn't stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever. He stumbles around and looks for faith and good works, even though he does not know what faith or good works are. Yet he gossips and chatters about faith and good works with many words. Faith is a living, bold trust in God's grace, so certain of God's favor that it would risk death a thousand times trusting in it. Such confidence and knowledge of God's grace makes you happy, joyful and bold in your relationship to God and all creatures. The Holy Spirit makes this happen through faith. Because of it, you freely, willingly and joyfully do good to everyone, serve everyone, suffer all kinds of things, love and praise the God who has shown you such grace.[7] John Wesley With a deep conviction, Wesley repeatedly stresses the necessity of faith. ‘Saving faith is a sure trust and confidence which a man has in God, that by the merits of Christ his sins are forgiven, and he is reconciled to the favour of God.’1 It is also clear that Wesley sees faith as a gift of God, although he does not emphasize that very much.[8] There is an initial coming to faith where one decides "I do believe in God." In that stage evidence is not a contradiction to belief. Most of the activity of faith involves personal trust in God's salvation and his providential care. In this regard evidece is irrelivant, unless we want to think of the content of personal experience of God as evidence.It is evidence of God's goodness. I think for the most part evidence is irrelevant to faith. Faith is not belief without evidence, it's the content of a relationship with God and is based upon the private experience of God's love. Source: This originally appeared in Metacrock's Blog and is seen here without any edits. Notes [1] "Faith," The Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms,SECOND EDITION, Revised and Expanded,Donald K. McKim ed.,Louiscille Kentucky:John Knox Press, 2014. https://www.mybibleteacher.net/uploads/1/2/4/6/124618875/the_westminster_dictionary_of_theological_terms_by_donald_k._mckim__z-lib.org_.epub.pdf [2] Ibid. [3] Ibid. [4] Ibid. [5] Mark Hansard, "Faith and Reason, Part 2 Augustine," Intervaristy: Emerging Scholars Network, (August 18,2018) https://blog.emergingscholars.org/2018/08/faith-and-reason-part-2-augustine-summer-2018-series/ [6]Shawn Floyd,"Aquinas Philosoph8ical Theology,"Internet Encyclopedia of Philosphy, https://iep.utm.edu/thomas-aquinas-political-theology/#SH3a [7]An excerpt from "An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans," Luther's German Bible of 1522 by Martin Luther, 1483-1546. Translated by Rev. Robert E. Smith from DR. MARTIN LUTHER'S VERMISCHTE DEUTSCHE SCHRIFTEN. Johann K. Irmischer, ed. Vol. 63 Erlangen: Heyder and Zimmer, 1854), pp.124-125. [EA 63:124-125] https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/martin-luthers-definition-faith [8]J. W. Maris, "John Wesley's Concept of Faith," Christian Library taken from Lux Mundi 2010 https://www.christianstudylibrary.org/article/john-wesleys-concept-faith https://www.amazon.com/dp/0982408765 Joseph Hinman's new book is God, Science and Ideology. Hinman argues that atheists and skeptics who use science as a barrier to belief in God are not basing doubt on science itself but upon an ideology that adherer's to science in certain instances. This ideology, "scientism," assumes that science is the only valid form of knowledge and rules out religious belief. Hinman argues that science is neutral with respect to belief in God … In this book Hinman with atheist positions on topics such as consciousness and the nature of knowledge, puts to rest to arguments of Lawrence M. Krauss, Victor J. Stenger, and Richard Dawkins, and delimits the areas for potential God arguments. Click above to return to Winter 2024. Share Previous Next Click here. Do you like what you just read? Subscribe today and receive sneak previews of Aletheia Today Magazine articles before they're published. Plus, you'll receive our quick-read, biweekly blog, Thoughts While Shaving. Subscribe Thanks for subscribing! Return to Table of Contents, Winter 2023 Issue Return to Table of Contents, Holiday Issue Return to Table of Contents, Halloween Issue Return to Table of Contents, Fall Issue Return to Table of Contents, Beach Issue Return to Table of Contents, June Issue

< Back How to Summer All Year Annie D. Stutley "I wonder how different the rest of the year, heck, the rest of my life would be if I did bottle summer’s secrets." Like sno-cone stands (or snoballs as we call them down here), hydrangea blossoms, and late sunsets, summer always comes back. I remember squirming in my desk as a kid on the last day of school, fixated on the second hand of the clock, anticipating the burst of energy that would course through my body the second the bell rang and summer, sweet exhilarating, reliable summer, would announce its arrival. If I could bottle that feeling, I’d cure a number of ailments, from anxiety to depression because, in that instant, possibility awakened me. Twelve unscripted weeks lay ahead. How I’d fill them was entirely unknown, but anything was possible because summer never hesitated for adventure. It was a hope worth living through fractions and diagramming sentences for. The question of what was around the corner ignited me, my ears perpetually perked for the next cool thing. What would my story be that summer? The unknown thrilled me. My last summer of possibility was after college, before I officially became a grown-up and May would move into June without so much as an “oh, wow. It’s already June?” Then I had kids and eventually I was, again, presented with twelve blank weeks with which I had to fill the gaps between Nick Jr. and rounds of Chutes and Ladders. So the summer before my oldest began kindergarten, I wrote a list of everything my three little rugrats and I could do that wouldn’t park them on the couch and make me feel guilty that the cast of “The Backyardigans” had a better childhood than my kids. I smacked the list on the fridge, and on mornings when I hadn’t a clue how to pass the hours before dinner, I went to that list for inspiration. It didn’t take long before I moved with the same stir of anticipation as when I was ten and conquering summers with wonder. Summer-Annie had returned. I photographed those three months, from mud pies to hose wars, and made a memory book. Summer was back in my life, just like the near 16 nectar snoballs I slurped. The following summer, the kids wanted in on the list. It was filled with silly things like “hunt for dinosaurs in Audubon Park,” but I was witnessing their embracing of possibility and seeing the spirit of summer through fresh eyes as we checked off each item of the list. As the calendar turned and the exhaustion of the countless end-of-school-year performances, projects, and parties whispered the sweet serenity of summer was coming each year, writing the list became summer’s trumpeter. Year after year, our list was as trimmed with the same sentimentality and tradition as Christmas, if not more because the pressure was off. Summer isn’t intimidating, if you can get past your less-than-satisfactory beach bod. The only control summer has is the freedom that the other seasons slowly suck away: an invitation to take the scenic route in everything. Scenic routes lead to who knows what? So can a good summer, and accepting that is a prerequisite to doing it right. Today, my kids are older. It’s been eleven years since our first list. Cheer, football, and club swim team have invaded those twelve precious weeks. It’s bittersweet how our summer lists have matured. The dinosaurs were eventually replaced with Pokémon Go, which was eventually usurped by Stranger Things . And now, as my oldest embarks on his last two years of high school, summer is a season of preparation, a bridge to get him to his next level. But the allure is still there – the anticipation that something great is coming and also that something is slipping away: childhood, adventure, the scenic route. His contributions to the list are coming full circle. He longs to hunt for dinosaurs again, and my heart wants to go with him. But possibility is still possible. Even today. But, possibility is only visible to those who choose to see it. Kids grow up, as do summers, but I wonder how different the rest of the year, heck, the rest of my life would be if I did bottle summer’s secrets. If only I could keep a bit of Summer-Annie and our lists all year long… Savor My favorite moment in summer was when I didn't know the weekday or the date. It was like being in a vortex where time didn’t exist. I finished the chapter of a good book, watched movies I’d saved for a later date, and I drove around the block until a favorite song finished. My kids slept when they were tired and woke when they weren’t. Even with our now busier summers, I still hear summer’s saxophone’s slower melody today, and when I do, I try to obey its call. During summer, we eat dinner whenever. I often edit and write until the wee hours of the morning. I drop everything and run to my balcony to watch beautiful sunsets and listen to the drumming of the tree frogs. Summer-Annie savors what she enjoys in life without the pressure of time. Simplicity Among the many nuisances of life, pairing socks is near the top of my list. Before the summer sports invasion, Summer-Annie had a strict no-socks rule — except for fuzzy socks, of course. Unless we were on a hike out of the city, flip-flops lead the way. But even today, after the last lunch has been packed or final exam conquered, my whole look suddenly simplifies. Makeup is an afterthought. Messy buns are even messier. I lose the belts and the bold jackets and throw on the same handful of sundresses or shorts. Summer-Annie doesn’t impress. Summer-Annie is who she is and drifts through the hottest months of the year with authoritative carelessness. Saying, “No, thank you.” Summer-Annie suddenly has gumption. The draw to hibernate with books, Netflix, game nights, and patio drinks is too strong to inhibit by keeping up appearances. It’s as if the hum of the cicadas drowns out the clamor of obligation. As I fire up the grill instead of my energy to get dressed up and attend some “to-do,” I finally listen to that little voice inside me, spoken from that part of me who could actually live happily on a deserted island, and I pause for my sanity. Summer-Annie considers just a little selfishness to be a downright responsible decision sometimes. Spontaneity My children are feral in the summer, as am I. This has not changed. Routines restrict us enough the rest of the year. Even though nowadays practices, camps, and meets open the door to the “Invasion of the Summer Snatchers,” it’s nothing compared to what a typical week in October looks like for us, and what we discover in our summer escapades is often more unforgettable than anything we learn the rest of the year. In summer, there is room to explore. I remember the first time I let one kid walk to the convenience store by himself to buy an ice-cold Coke. He came back a new man, wiser, experienced, and itching to wander off again. My daughter has a twenty-two-hour playlist on her Apple Music account. She peels away at it on bike rides through suburbia. My mom didn’t have the Find-My app to know where the heck I was when I was a kid and she’d boot me out the door with a firm: “Go play!” But I have the app, and I smile as I see three little dots moving about on their off hours – three feral cats taking to the streets with their alley-cat friends. Sometimes they check in. “Hey, Mom, can I use my debit card to get a slice of pizza?” Or, “Mom, I’m sleeping at Vivian’s.” I used to be part of all their adventures, and for the briefest of moments I long to be part of today’s version of their “dinosaur hunt.” Yet, their spreading wings bring me a certain satisfaction. They get it. They get the glory of of sucking the marrow out a season and living it to its fullest. Summer-Annie gives in to wandering and the roads less traveled. I knew eleven years ago that if I didn’t spark the magic, I'd miss the opportunity to ignite memories. I am the giver of my children’s traditions, and perhaps the best one I have to offer is to embrace the delicacy of childhood and adolescence. One day, they’ll be just another grown-up working in July, and something, maybe a kid in flip-flops riding his bike in a wet bathing suit with a gaggle of friends racing behind, will remind them of that sweet season when possibility ran through every second like the best energy going. At that moment, I hope they understand that possibility is always around the corner, no matter the season. We just need to break from the boundaries we enforce on ourselves to see it never really left us. As sure as nectar snoballs on a steamy June day, possibility always returns. Are we ready to follow where it takes us? Annie D. Stutley lives and writes in New Orleans, La. She edits several small publications and contributes to various print and online magazines. Her blog, " That Time You, " was ranked in the Top 100 Blogs by FeedSpot. To read more of her work, go to her website , or follow her at @anniedstutley or Annie D. Stutley-writer on Facebook. Return to our Summer 2023 Table of Contents Previous Next